Posted on 01/05/2006 10:00:25 AM PST by Feldkurat_Katz
From today on, not every baby born in this country will automatically be a New Zealand citizen.
Changes to the Citizenship Act mean there are tighter rules on children acquiring citizenship at birth.
It will only happen now if at least one of their parents is a New Zealand citizen or is entitled to be in New Zealand, the Cook Islands, Tokelau or Niue indefinitely.
The changes have been brought in to recognise the value of citizenship.
Registrar-General of Births, Deaths and Marriages, Brian Clarke, says very few babies born in New Zealand will be affected by the changes.
The Department of Internal Affairs says the changes have been brought in to ensure the benefits of citizenship only go to those with a genuine and ongoing link to the country.
Meanwhile there has been a call to speed up the process of acquiring the right to live in New Zealand permanently.
Dr Nagalingham Rasalingham of the Refugee Council says the new rule delays the citizenship process for asylum seekers, which can be a very stressful time.
He says he will be writing to the Immigration Service to get some pace to the process.
I think we should take a lesson from the Kiwis and Spuds.
When do we start doing this? Is there a petition I can sign?
Let's see. Russia has had a flat tax for sexeral years now. And the Irish and Kiwis have abolished birthright citizenship? Why are we always so far behind?
Too many demonrats?
Bring this to our shores. I like the criteria of one parent a citizen or a 100% legal DOCUMENTED immigrant.
Yep, I hope we're next!
Good call on their part and I think we should follow suit.
Our Congress doesn't have the guts to do this. They don't want to loose votes.
The Spuds.... Come on man... We saved Civilization and you refer to us as spuds....
"Let's see. Russia has had a flat tax for sexeral years now. And the Irish and Kiwis have abolished birthright citizenship? Why are we always so far behind?
Too many demonrats?"
Nope. Too many Republicans, and not enough conservatives.
Im proud to be a spud myself but not sure how "we" saved civilization.
Does the US have to wait for the example of others now? Whatever happened to the ones who signed the Declaration of Independence? Bred out of us?
You must not shame the humble potato! The lowly spud is worthy of great respect!
All bow before the greatest of tubers!
Cops investigate criminal matters. IF/ WHEN Congress ever gets around to making being here illegally a criminal matter instead of a civil matter with a prize inside, then maybe we can get somewhere. Plenty of things are illegal that are not crimes.
INS doesn't charge people, they deport people. For example,unless an illegal in MN is convicted of a felony, INS can care less to see or hear about an illegal.
Until our feds decide to do something, Pawlenty can't do much of what he wants.
The 1996 Immigration Reform Act made MPLS and similar city's "sanctuary" laws protecting illegal immigrants from any police questioning about their visa status illegal--- but it's never enforced by the feds.If it were, you'd see fines and sanctions against cities that do this BS.
IOW,I won't hold my breath.
Irish monks were so backwards that, in the dark ages, they did not get in on the book burning fad that was spreading like fire throughout Europe (ho ho ho, I crack myself up). Thus, they saved many great works of western civilization from destruction, just by being isolated and backwards, and when Europe realized its folly, the Irish had those books ferreted away and knowledge began to spread again.
Common sense rules.
what bugs me is that our political system seems to be less responsive than the Irish and Kiwi ones.
We need this really, really badly. I hate the idea that an illegal immigrant can stay here because they managed to have a baby here.
IANAL, so I'm not certain of which of these might win out:
One legal argument being made is that a constitutional amendment changing the 14th amendment is needed to accomplish this. I'd say this is extremely unlikely at best.
Another legal argument I've seen made is that the interpretation of the 14th amendment needs to be changed. I think a test case with a favorable Supreme Court ruling is a much more likely possibility.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.